Germany recently passed a cross-party resolution on fighting anti-Semitism, “Never Again is Now: Protecting Jewish Life in Germany.”
Standing up to hate directed at Jewish people should be something completely unproblematic, particularly in Germany and in light of rising anti-Semitic acts.
But sadly it’s not that simple: criticism of the state of Israel is often conflated with anti-Semitism in Germany, with Israel’s security often referred to as Germany’s Staatsräson or reason of state.Â
READ ALSO: What is Germany's Staatsräson and why is it being talked about so much right now?
The resolution was passed with a huge majority in the Bundestag last week. The Bundestag fraction of the Greens say they “have vehemently advocated for such a cross-party approach to anti-Semitism".
"Those who despise democracy are mobilising worldwide," the Greens said. "It is therefore an important sign that democrats in the parliament of the country responsible for the Holocaust stand together.”
Despite the emotive title and the date set for passing the bill, just before the anniversary of the November pogrom, known as Kristallnacht when the Nazis made their intentions of violence towards Jews known for the first time, the text is highly contentious and a broad coalition has been warning of the dangers of it.
READ ALSO: German parliament passes controversial anti-Semitism resolution
Fears it will silence critics of Israel
The text, which is not legally binding but is expected to be influential, demands that no public money “should go to organisations or projects which spread anti-Semitism, question Israel’s right to exist or call to boycott Israel.”
Experts say it is comparable to the BDS Resolution passed by the Bundestag in 2019, which was a condemnation of the campaign to boycott, divest from and sanction Israel for human rights violations. The new resolution was inspired partly by the failings of the Documenta 15 art festival, when an antisemitic mural was funded with public money and put on public display in the town of Kassel.
The resolution calls for Germany's states to implement the widespread but disputed IHRA definition of anti-Semitism when looking at funding of groups and projects.Â
A collective of 33 anti-Zionist Jewish organisations across 19 countries published a public letter on their “outrage and condemnation” about the resolution on Monday. "While paying lip service to 'all the facets' of Jewish life, the resolution narrows that life down to one element: the state of Israel."
“Despite claiming that freedom of speech, art and science must be protected, the resolution paves the way for an even greater stifling of those freedoms than has already been widespread, especially since October 2023”, the organisations said, adding that “instead of uniting society in the fight against all discrimination, any such resolution will divide minorities by focusing only on one".
Alongside prominent academics such as media professor Kai Ambos and law professor Ralf Michaels, journalists like Tilo Jung and human rights organisations have spoken out against it.
Amnesty International warned in a public letter that the “resolution goes very far in its intervention into basic rights and especially into public funding regulations". Even Israeli NGOs like HaMoked, who provide legal support for Palestinians in the occupied West Bank, complained that they wouldn’t be able to apply for German funding if this passes.
Journalist Jürgen Kaube hit back at the criticism, writing in German newspaper FAZ: “The present draft (of the resolution) certainly leaves room for case-by-case decisions as to when criticism of the Israeli government turns into anti-Semitism. It is simply not true that the resolution endangers Jews who are critical of Israel's policies. It is not a law.”
Questions have also been raised over what has been included in the resolution. For instance, the text doesn’t refer to the neo-Nazi attack on a synagogue in the German city of Halle three years ago. But it does find space to refer to a supposed anti-Semitism scandal at the Berlinale film festival earlier this year, when an acceptance speech by Israeli and Palestinian filmmakers Yuval Abraham and Basel Adra referred to “apartheid” and “genocide” in the occupied Palestinian territories, as professor of international law Matthias Goldmann pointed out a press conference held to oppose the resolution.
Philosopher Susan Nieman, author of Learning from the Germans and director of the Einstein Forum, said that she had already encountered people refusing to visit Germany due to the censorious politics on Israel. Nieman added that these bans would affect Jews who criticise Israel, including those who held the same position as Einstein, who supported a state with equal rights for Arabs and Jews.
PODCAST: Germany's Berlinale backlash explained
Focus on 'imported anti-Semitism'Â
Germany has seen a huge crackdown on speech in relation to Israel in recent years. This has intensified since Hamas’ terror attack on Israeli citizens on October 7th 2023 - a fact recorded by the Archive of Silence. Renowned Jewish thinkers such as Masha Gessan and Nancy Fraser have had invitations to award ceremonies or public lectures rescinded after criticising Israel’s devastation of Gaza, with author Naomi Klein quipping: "At this rate, Germany is going to run out of Jewish intellectuals to ban."Â
These aren’t just anecdotes: internal figures by the Diaspora Alliance has shown that around a quarter of those censored are Jewish, which is hugely disproportionate in a country where Jews make up less than one percent of the population.
More conservative-leaning Jewish groups like Germany’s Central Council of Jews as well as pro-Israel groups such as the German Israel Society were in favour of the resolution. Volker Beck, the President of the German Israel Society, said that the agreement was an important signal that the democratic parties were jointly assuming the special German responsibility.
But some of its supporters may be a cause for concern too: it was voted for by the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) and was praised for adopting the party's language by Beatrix von Storch, the granddaughter of Hitler’s finance minister.
Von Storch praised the “repressive possibilities” mentioned and the adoption of the concept of “Muslim and imported anti-Semitism,” which she said originally came from the AfD, quoting the text which mentioned anti-Semitism coming “from the countries of North Africa and the Near and Middle East”.
The resolution adds: “Where anti-Semitism and hostility towards Israel are widespread, also due to Islamist and anti-Israeli state indoctrination.” This shouldn’t be too surprising: the influential 2019 BDS resolution was originally drafted by the AfD, and was adopted by other mainstream parties.
READ ASO:Â Fact check - Do new German citizens have to affirm Israel's right to exist?
The only party to vote against the resolution was the populist Sahra Wagenknecht Alliance (BSW). The Left Party had proposed an alternative resolution developed with independent experts, but after it was rejected they abstained on the main vote.
It is not just the content of the resolution that is controversial, but the process by which it was handled, too. After being debated for an entire year the final draft was published late on the Friday, just days before it was due to be passed, amid the surprise US election results.
A former draft was also only published due to a legal request and it was completely unclear until recently what had been changed in the final resolution after significant critique from lawyers. In the end, it wasn’t much. Many fear it wasn’t enough - and that freedom of speech and the pluralism of Jewish life in Germany will suffer as a result.
Comments (4)